Sunday, April 22, 2007

Springtime in Wisconsin: Cut your grass and cut educational programming


Springtime in Wisconsin means different things to different people. Some people cannot wait to get back outside, work in the garden and cut the grass for the first time. Others, like school administrators and board members dread spring, because the cutting they have to do is not outside, but in the classroom. You see, each spring they have a budget to complete for the upcoming year and every year it seems a little harder to complete.

Many districts across the state have joined the ranks of RUSD in cutting programs in order to balance the budget. One of the reasons why RUSD seems to be continually asking the residents of eastern Racine County is that when the revenue caps went into effect in 1993, the RUSD board did not levy the maximum amount (thinking the revenue caps were only going to be in effect for a few years). However, the revenue caps were made permanent and RUSD has been behind the proverbial 8 ball ever since.

I think the revenue caps are a great idea in theory, but the current constraints of the QEO (Qualified Economic Offer) and the equalization aid is now hurting many districts across the state. Clearly, we need a different way to fund our public schools. We need to take the burden off the property tax rolls and make it more equitable for all.

Back in 2003, Governor Jim Doyle appointed a blue-ribbon commission to study the issue and they recommendation was an increase in the sales tax.

Is shifting the burden of funding our schools from the homeowners to all consumers the best way to do this? What do you think?

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

OK - someone didn't really cut that Ben Franklin in half, did they?

No - funding should remain with propertyowners (not just homeowners kick in towards Unified, let's not forget the large portion from business,) or people who have a stake in the community. But you're asking the question based on the assumption they NEED the money.

RUSD needs to get their financial house in order. They are top heavy and could save millions, however they continually refuse to do so.

There are very fine school districts in this country where not only is the burden exclusively on property owners, but there is a reduction in the propertyowner percentage of school funding as they retire. In some municipalities, seniors pay zero, zilch, nada toward the schools...some of these in the Atlanta area. But obviously these districts know something RUSD refuses to admit.

Increasing the sales tax will do exactly zero, zilch, nada to improve schools! With a new cash flow source, there will be even less attempt to remain accountable...BECAUSE THEY WON'T HAVE TO BE.

And you will have now given even more propertyowners (including businesses) a reason to pack up and leave.

Brenda said...

Thanks for your comments, I have been thinking about your comments for a few days. You raise excellent questions which lead me to discuss this issue further.

Many areas in the country support their schools via state dollars and sales tax - they do not support them with LOCAL property taxes. You are right, many areas do not make seniors pay for the school system.

I am not suggesting a sales tax on TOP of the local property taxes, I am simply wondering if a state wide sales tax would be a more equitable way to fund our schools. In this scenario, property tax owners would not be paying the school portion part of the bill.

I believe our schools have enough (for the most part) money; the funding formula is not working and the disparities among the districts is growing because of it.


I am not suggesting any NEW taxes, I just think the time has come to fund schools a different way.